all current longs are always screaming about how fnma is getting a raw deal..how they are wildly profitable and that they should be released from conservatorship once they pay back the govt....and that the company should be privatized, and that the common stock has value..etc....but what about all the people that owned fnma prior to conservatorship?..they basically lost it all, they had to eat the huge loss, cashing out their shares for literally pennies..very much doubt if more than 5% actually held on to their shares, if that much.. i mean they were told it was all over and that the company would be dissolved...now if they let fnma live, essentially going against what was promised....they get nothing, all their shares are long gone...they got bankrupted..this stock was supposed to be over right...what kind of precedence would that set....does that sound fair?
It sure does sound fair, investors lose money and sometimes make money it all depends on the market and your strategy. How about the investors who lost all of their savings on Enron, AIG, the big 3, etc.etc are we suppose to compensate these investors? Hell no, you gamble on stocks there is no way you are going to know if it is going north or south look at appl #$%$ stock is down $300 you can't blame anyone for your fukupsbuddy
Sentiment: Strong Buy
They didn't have to sell their shares. You could make the same claim about any of the banks that lost 90% or more in equity value or General Motors for that matter. If you are complaining, I'm guessing you sold at a huge loss. Sorry.
That's where you're wrong. The banks will pay dearly for this. The $41B lawsuit against the government is not some made up fantasy. It seeks justice for the exact scenario you're referring to. While I appreciate your concern, it also ignores the big picture. We want the government to follow the law, as they have set the rules that lay down the low for banks. In other words, it's a win win. Unconstitutional for the conservatorship to take from shareholders before and after 2008. Release from conservatorship, feds pay shareholders for their kind service (shareholders are taxpayers too), and we move on. Don't let the banks do it again, and slap them with huge lawsuits everytime they try it, as the UC System did yesterday. Bingo, bango, bongo!
Yes, that sounds fair. Not only FNMA, playing stocks is gambling. People bought FNMA before 2008, if they sold it, they lost. If they hold and buy more to average down, they win.
That is 100% fair.
The current lawsuit was in the amount of $41 Billion dollars once that is settled(when) they will be compensated for that. This lawsuit was for shareholders during pre-2008.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
that was me but i bought much more at .26 and .32 cents, believing housing got us in the mess and will get us out. i can only tell you if fnma and fmcc are freed, the pps will soar to 30 to 60 to 200 plus....all longs will win big. those pre and post crisis. this is the most important point of all. fnma and fmcc need to be freed. it cannot be legal for the fed to hold them much longer.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
QUE??????? I am impressed that you are able to write.... so I suppose you were happy to see Enron restructure and settle and funnel all the money back to the same banks who controlled them while the shareholder got ZERO-13 cents a share??? FAIR????
i owned freddie before c-ship and think my cost basis was about $5.20 or so...on 10,000 shares, yes, that's right, she sunk, i sunk with it, but when she got down intot he 30 cent range packed ii in to lower cost basis to $1.19....so as of a six weeks ago or so, i broke even and am now plus 44% gain.
its going to be very, very, very, hard to explain if fnma shares pop significantly, how shares of fnma are magically worth money when hundreds of millions of shareholders got bankrupted...its literally like someone dying, you go to their funeral, bury them, grieve, and then 5 years later you run into them shopping at the mall!!
nobody forced them to sell... as you know, you don't have a loss until you sell. I bought FNMA precisely because it was in conservatorship and that it was a GSE. I figured there was no way the government could/would shut it down. Yes, I know its a gamble but it one that I'm willing to take. What I do not understand is the August 2012 senior preferred stock deal that transfers all of Fannie's profit to the treasury without reducing its debt in perpetutity.....That arrangement came out of the blue and in my opinion, illegal.